On 11/19/2018 10:54 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 10:32:01PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 11/19/2018 08:45 PM, Adam Ford wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 12:36 PM Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 10:54 AM Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> All boards should now be migrated to use CONFIG_BLK. This series removes >>>>> those with build problems using this option. >>>>> >>>>> If maintainers want to keep these boards in they should send a patch in >>>>> the next week or two. Otherwise the board will be removed in the next >>>>> release, and will need to be added and re-reviewed later. >>>>> >>>>> The goal is to have all boards use driver model. But so far, we do allow >>>>> CONFIG_DM to not be defined. >>>>> >>>>> PLEASE NOTE: This is not an easy process. It is possible that your board >>>>> does work, or works with only minor changes. Please try to understand that >>>>> the removal of a board is not done because people don't like your board. >>>>> In fact the board might have been the first one I used when trying out >>>>> U-Boot! It's just that we expect maintainers to keep up with the migration >>>>> to driver model which has been running now for 4 years. It just isn't >>>>> possible for a few people to migrate and test hundreds of boards. >>>>> >>>>> So, send a patch! >>>> >>>> OK, so with the intention of "need to light a fire", consider the fire >>>> lit! But, I think v2 of this series needs to: >>>> - Address the bug that's been noted of you checking on "DM_BLK" when >>>> it's really just "BLK". >>>> - Do a test build with BLK just being unconditional now. For example, >>>> you're deleting the am335x_evm family but it builds fine with BLK >>>> being enabled now. I even gave it a run time test via test.py and >>>> we're fine. So, I think a new run where you see what fails to build >>>> with BLK enabled by default now is in order to come up with a new >>>> delete list. >>>> >>> >>> When we were migrating toward GCC 6, we introduced a warning message >>> that was displayed at build indicating older versions of GCC would be >>> unsupported, and GCC 6 would become a requirement. The >>> CONFIG_DM_I2C_COMPAT generates a build warning and suggests that it be >>> removed. I would like to propose that in the future, when setting >>> deadlines, we insert something into the build mechanism that generates >>> a warning to tell people that something is going to happen. >> >> I agree, that sounds good. >> >> I am extremely unhappy by how Simon decided, unilaterally, some >> arbitrary deadline, told pretty much no one about that deadline and then >> put a knife on many peoples' throats by sending out this series which >> removes boards that are actively used and maintained, demanding they be >> converted right this instant. > > OK, lets step back for a moment. Part of the problem is that yes, we > (I) never found a good way to make a big scary build warning happen. > But, lets look at https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/798309/ for a > moment, which is when we set this deadline, and we had a good bit of > discussion about related issues to make it happen. > > I also know that around the v2018.05 release I said, in public, but no I > can't find a link right this moment, that we were pushing off a little > bit on dropping _everything_ right then as there was basically some > fairly important / widely used USB stuff that hadn't been converted yet > (which has since been, I think, otherwise am335x_evm & co wouldn't have > been happy?). I know I did since I can see in the archives a number of > series where maintainers did a bunch of changes to various platforms / > SoCs to turn on BLK right then. > > So, no, I don't want to drop a bunch of platforms _right_now_. But we > really need to see what doesn't link anymore with BLK forced on, and > plan from there.
If we have a list of boards which do not build and their maintainers are notified reasonable in advance, that is fine by me. A Makefile warning is good IMO. -- Best regards, Marek Vasut _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
